Posted on 04/20/2015 11:53:58 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Glenn Beck on Monday interviewed Wisc. Gov. Scott Walker (R), who is widely expected to be running for president in 2016. Though Beck had reservations before the interview, when it concluded, Beck said he “loved” the man.
“I loved him,” Beck said. “I was really impressed with him, really liked him. [I] thought he had great answers for everything. We didn’t push him to the wall on things, but it’s our first meeting and I thought he had really reasonable answers.”
Beck said he would like to speak with Walker more about immigration and the Middle East, but he was “very impressed” with what he heard.
The two discussed everything from Common Core — which Walker said he would “absolutely” repeal if it came to his desk — to Walker’s accomplishments as governor of a deep blue state.
“It is the home of the progressive movement,” Walker said of Wisconsin. “Collective bargaining was started there. … It was the state that had the first income tax. Who would have thought that in that city, in the state of Wisconsin, which hasn’t gone Republican for president since 1984, we would be able to take on four years ago the Public Employees Union? And not only win that battle, but win the recalls against a whole bunch of state senators? Win a recall against me and the lieutenant governor?”
“But now Wisconsin, when it comes to public employee unions … we can hire and fire based on merit,” Walker continued. “We can pay based on performance. We’re the 25th state in the nation that has a right-to-work. We have photo ID requirements for voting. We defunded Planned Parenthood. … We cut taxes by $2 billion and property taxes are lower today than they were four years ago. Who would have thought that would happen?”
Good God,” Beck remarked.
“But we said shortly after the 2010 election, we had to go big and we had to go bold,” Walker added. “It was put up or shut up time. And even in Madison, Wisconsin, we were able to get that done.”
Beck asked the governor what the secret is to making such bold changes.
“We had to win amongst independents by 11, almost 12-point margins,” Walker responded. “The interesting thing is, to win the center, you don’t have to move to the center of the issues. You have to lead. You have to clearly spell out what you’re going to do. Tell the people what you’ll do, and then do it.”
Beck said he is still a little “nervous” that Walker is an “establishment” Republican, but between Walker and the already-announced presidential candidates, there are “tremendous possibilities” for 2016.
[ Beck said he is still a little “nervous” that Walker is an “establishment” Republican, but between Walker and the already-announced presidential candidates, there are “tremendous possibilities” for 2016. ]
I do worry that Rubio and walker are the “Dark Horse Establishment picks” for the GOP.
People like Walker for the right reasons. In any other year he'd probably be my number one, but this year it's Ted.
I would have to go back and review news from the time, but my recollection is that there were establishment types who did not want Walker to go up against state government unions.
It seems they thought the fight couldn't be won and shouldn't be fought. You know... the "don't make waves" crew of Republicans.
Perhaps someone with a better memory could fill in the gaps.
I agree. Walker is by far the best of the Republican political establishment but he is still a part of that establishment. He will greatly slow the the slide to the left but he is not a radical reformer and that’s what America needs. America needs Ted Cruz.
Walker’s ‘path to citizenship” for ILLEGAL aliens is a deal breaker.
Walker is an alright guy but what he says and what he says are not always the same as what he says.
As far as I’m concerned there is no second choice it is IMO Cruz or Lose what he says is what he means; past, present, and future, all other candidates are inferior to what our Constitutional Free Republic needs to survive.
Glenn Beck? I used to know someone named Glenn Beck. Dead to me now, though....
“We had to win amongst independents by 11, almost 12-point margins,” Walker responded. “The interesting thing is, to win the center, you don’t have to move to the center of the issues. You have to lead. You have to clearly spell out what you’re going to do. Tell the people what you’ll do, and then do it.”
Political quote of the year.
Mike Gallagher interviewed Linda Grahmnesty today on WRHI-Rock Hill SC. Mike loves Linda.
I needed a shower after only a few minutes of the love fest...
>>I would have to go back and review news from the time, but my recollection is that there were establishment types who did not want Walker to go up against state government unions.<<
Not just establishment types. His own legislative leaders, who were very conservative, were initially skeptical when Walker began pushing to take on the public sector unions.
It’s important to understand one thing. Act 10 actually cut union employees’ pay by, in one fell swoop, undoing years of negotiating in which unions managed to get the employers to pay both the employer-half and the employee-half of the state retirement payments. The original system was very similar to Social Security in which both parties split the cost, and when Act 10 was passed the employee share (paid almost universally by the employer by that time) was around 6% of salary.
Upon passage of Act 10, the employers were forbidden from paying the employee share and so take home pay for teachers and state workers dropped by 6% as the state retirement share was deducted from their wages.
That, by the way, is the primary reason that the recall effort was launched, and is also why the state remains so divided today. If you got your family pay cut, Walker did it, and you’re still angry at him. Period. Plus, because all teachers were affected, a lot of parents of teachers and adult children of teachers took on that same anger.
Yet he did it, and he prevailed, and he won two more elections. That took stones, and if he ever wavered, he never, ever, showed it.
Imagine if he were negotiating with the Iranians today, instead of Obama. Just imagine. Seriously.
He has to be running to help Jeb not look so bad in SC
In my opinion, Walker will be the most effective at taking on the Left and defunding them. He’s done exactly that in Wisconsin and I see no reason why he won’t do the same as President. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the Department of Education dismantled entirely during a Walker administration, for example, although I doubt he’d make that a campaign promise.
The fact that he attracts the establishment vote is a plus because it increases his odds of taking down Bush (and Christie, if necessary), and is probably more due to his pro-business attitude than anything. They can rely upon him to cut taxes, regulations, and make business-friendly decisions, because he believes that a healthy business environment is good for the state, and the country.
I suspect he’ll be accused of crony capitalism, but I doubt he’ll be sending money to the likes of Solyndra. He should be asked over and over during his campaign how he would treat large businesses seeking to carve out special treatment from government, however.
With Beck, that means little. I remember when he used to “love” Chris Christie. He played Barry White music whenever he talked about Jersey Fats and called it Christie Porn.
>>Walker’s ‘path to citizenship” for ILLEGAL aliens is a deal breaker.<<
There isn’t a single GOP contender who will run on a platform of sending every illegal here today back across the border. Not one. Every GOP candidate has, and will, offered at least some illegals a path to a legal green card.
That’s not a path to citizenship, however. But good luck finding a candidate who won’t offer a green card to some of those already here illegally because no such candidate exists, including the esteemed Senator Cruz. The difference between how Walker, Cruz, or Paul treat illegals will turn out to be minimal, as will be seen during the debates.
Their platform: Many will be issued green cards and many will be returned to their home countries. The borders will be secured and those violating our immigration law after that point will be denied entry forever. The issuance of new green cards will be strictly controlled and will depend upon labor shortages and a need for migrant help in certain industries, but not full-time, year round help, plus consideration for those with high skills who will benefit the economy. Family members will no longer be automatically considered. And anyone voting who is not a citizen will be summarily deported.
Count on it. That will be the platform even of Bush and Rubio in the end (although neither of them is likely to mean it.)
There is a vast chasm between the two positions. How about we enforce our laws making it illegal for employers to hire them. They are coming here for jobs. With no jobs, they will go home.
That’s not a path to citizenship, however.
I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean but Walker signed a resolution that praised the economic and civic contributions of undocumented immigrants and called for “a new program similar to the Federal amnesty program enacted by Congress in 1986.”
I call that a path to citizenship. You are free to call it anything you'd like.
You won’t find a single candidate, including Cruz, running on self-deportation either, even if you can convince them to call it “making it illegal for employers to hire them.”
And amnesty is not the same as a path to citizenship, although, as you said, you will continue to call it that. So be it.
With his signature, Walker supported AMNESTY.
Focus on these words, and if you still can't comprehend, have someone explain it to you. After this post I am done with you.
At a 2002 Mexican Independence Day event in Milwaukee, Wis., Mr. Walker, then the county executive, signed a resolution that praised the economic and civic contributions of undocumented immigrants and called for “a new program similar to the Federal AMNESTY program enacted by Congress in 1986.”
You lose.
Yep. They were discussing Linda’s presidential aspirations.
Linda also believes there are only 11 million illegals in this country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.